Thank you, Eugene Robinson. Rarely does one get to recognize Liberal mendacity so quickly, as is made possible by your article in Investor’s Business Daily.
In the title, Robinson reveals all that’s needed to know about the Liberal mindset:
“GOP Didn’t Want ObamaCare, Now Complain It Doesn’t Work”
“Now”, Eugene? Au contraire…they don’t want it BECAUSE it won’t work.
Then, in the first two sentences, he manages to continue misrepresenting the position of the GOP where this disgusting travesty known as Obamacare is concerned.
Republicans have repeatedly stated the law is unworkable…and NEVER state they ‘want the law now’. But what the heck, Obama lies…why shouldn’t Robinson?
That’s not a ‘cheer’ you hear Eugene, that’s a cry of despair over the disaster of a bad law’s rollout. And whoever was in charge of that disaster deserves to be fired. NOW.
Plus, this lousy law IS implemented Jan, 2014…how on earth do you believe Obama’s still got ‘three years and change’ to make it work? Americans need insurance NOW.
And don’t even get us started on how you can define skyrocketing premiums and huge deductibles being forced on Americans through exchanges as …customer-friendly?
Not to mention how you can casually shrug off as “careless” Obama’s repeated lies that, ‘if people liked their insurance, they could keep their insurance’. Or how Obama “explaining the fine print” after invoking the lie…could possibly have made those lying promises of his less of a lie?
BlueCollar usually links articles…but, as is typically the case when it comes to Eugene Robinson, this one’s so mendacious – if honesty is to be respected – we can’t.
Opinion articles should at least be based on a factual premise – Robinson’s rarely are.
We respect Investor’s Business Daily, and can’t help but wonder what motivates such a great source of information to publish rubbish that doesn’t even make good fiction?
So, we linked to IBD above…if you enjoy trash, Robinson’s article is there for review.
And, would it be too much to ask IBD that, if op-eds from the Left must be published, they at least include some semblance of fact in their position?